Day Of Defiance!
“A law based upon lies is no law at all.”
- Michael J. McFadden
- Author of Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains
► Their Health Lies ◄
► Their Economic Lies ◄
► Bans Are NOT Inevitable! ◄
► Their Next Move ◄
► What YOU Need To Do! ◄
“The aim is (to) reduce the public acceptability of
smoking and the culture which surrounds it.”
- Lady Elaine Murphy
- Member, British House Of Lords
v.UK1gh
The Smoking Ban
CAN Be Overturned!!
A Call For Action
The smoking ban is based upon lies: lies about the health effects of
small amounts smoke upon workers, lies about patron demands,
and lies about the economic effects on pubs & businesses.
The antismoking lobby lied about these things because they knew
that people would never agree to a ban based only on the demands
of noisy extremists forcing a nanny state on others. They lied
because they know that if a ban’s true economic consequences were
told truly that business owners would have risen up and united in
protest. They lie simply because the truth does not support their
goal: “To reduce the public acceptability of smoking.”
This ban CAN be overturned if pubs and their patrons stand and
resist an unjust and ill-based law. Pub staff, customers, and all
British citizens need to see the lies behind the ban, refuse to act as
Informers or Collaborators enforcing the ban, and demand the
ban’s amendment to decently based general standards for clean air
and good health without the trampling of private rights.
The last attempt to ban smoking on the European Continent ended
in 1945. The idea that the same lies and propaganda should form
the basis of a new set of bans fifty years later is unconscionable and
can not be allowed to stand!
Join together and send this ban
Back To Hell!
2
The Health Arguments
Antismokers claim that scientific studies prove that second-hand smoke is
killing workers. If that were true then smoking bans might be justified
despite business losses and social disruption. Because of the media power
of billions of taxpayer dollars most people have come to believe that such
claims are true.
They are not. Quite plainly and simply....
THEY ARE NOT TRUE.
There has never been a single study showing that the low level of smoke in
bars and restaurants with modern ventilation systems kills ANYONE. Even
most studies of intense unventilated lifelong daily exposure fail the most
basic research standard of statistical significance.
You might ask then why the news keeps saying secondary smoke is a killer.
The answer is simple: money and trickery.
Antismoking extremists subvert the political process with campaign
money, with surprise legislation at the end of sessions, and with the
sheer power of their funding for press-releases and conferences. They
have over 800 million dollars a year to spend on “Tobacco Control”
and they’re not afraid to use it.
A lot of that money goes into studies deliberately designed to give the
"proper" results and to publicize those results over and over again as though
they were new studies rather than just old ones recycled with a twist. The
media rarely questions information from Antismokers since it's assumed they
are the "good guys" and have no reason to lie.
3
Bad assumption.
The Antismoking Lobby believes its true end goal, the elimination of
smoking, is important enough to justify all sorts of lying along the way. And
the most effective lie they've found is that "Secondhand Smoke Kills."
At New York’s 1975 World Conference on Smoking and Health,
Antismoking activists were told that to eliminate smoking it
would first be essential to “create an atmosphere in
which it was perceived that active smokers
would injure those around them, especially their
family and any infants or young children…”
- Huber. Consumers Research Magazine. 04/92
When they first came up with this lie they had no evidence at all to support
it, but began pumping money into creating such evidence. Today, billions
of dollars later, they can point to a pile of very equivocal studies, ignore
their weaknesses and lack of real findings, and simply claim they all “prove”
the need for smoking bans.
They do not. The great majority of them fail even the bare
minimum standard of statistical significance. Some even
indicate a protective effect from secondary smoke!
There's obviously no way to disprove every single study here, but we can
show the frauds behind the major ones used by Antismoking Lobbyists.
These studies were all cited by the Surgeon General in 2006 to add
urgency to his call for smoking bans. Read these five examples and realize
that the same shenanigans surrounding these “major” studies also occur
every day in reports about new ones.
4
The Great Helena Heart Fraud
(R.P. Sargent et al. Reduced incidence of admissions for myocardial infarction associated
with public smoking ban…” BMJ 2004; 328: 977-980 & Rapid Responses)
On April 1st, 2003, the "Great Helena Heart Miracle" was
announced. Headlines around the world claimed that Helena,
Montana “protected” its citizens from secondary smoke and saw
an immediate 60% drop in heart attacks: absolute proof smoking
bans protect innocent people!
The study’s release was followed quickly by statements from
Medical Associations, antismoking groups, and the authors
themselves, saying: “(Bans are) the only logical response to… the
dangers of secondhand smoke.”, “This is not the first study to find
a link between long term exposure to secondhand smoke and
heart attacks.”, “Secondhand smoke kills.”, “(owners want) to be
allowed to continuing poisoning people (despite) the immediate
effect of it.”
While there are many problems with this study, one of the biggest
is that the researchers refused to reveal the data for nonsmokers
while presenting the news as if it was all about nonsmokers.
In reality, the study never examined exposure to smoke,
never corrected for confounders, and never even reported
on nonsmokers as a separate group! The study itself
found nothing at all about the effects of smoke on
nonsmokers!
The Helena study was deliberately distorted by
supposedly “responsible authorities” and was used to
manipulate the medical & political community as well
as the general public into supporting smoking bans.
5
A final revealing point: a chart in the initial study (later
conveniently removed) showed a real dip in heart attacks only in
the first 3 months when angry smokers likely partied out of town in
the warm weather. However, for the last 3 cold Montana winter
months when smokers returned home the rate returned to roughly
normal: Not a return after the ban ended as Antismokers always
loudly proclaim to the media and lawmakers. Just another lie, but
only known to those who saw the initial data or have internet
access to the British Medical Journal.
This study has done enormous harm to people’s lives
and livelihoods wherever it has been used to frighten
nonsmokers and politicians into supporting extremist
smoking bans.
Update: 2006: A new study, based on government data and
1,000 times as large as Helena (315,000 heart attacks!) has
shown that smoking bans actually have no effect on overall heart
attack rates. This study, available at SmokersClubInc.com, has
been publicly supported and confirmed by noted Antismoking
researcher and physician, Dr. Michael Siegel and featured by the
American Council on Science and Health.
Advancing a falsehood to promote the social
engineering of free people should never be taken
lightly, but it’s being done every day by the
Antismoking Lobby.
And The Great Helena
Heart Fraud is far from being the only example.
6
Eisner’s 53 Bartenders Study
(Eisner et al. Bartenders’ Respiratory Health…. JAMA.1998; 280: 1909-1914)
Huge headlines were made in 1998 when a study claimed to show a dramatic
improvement in the health of California bartenders after a smoking ban. Those
headlines never mentioned three important facts though:
 At least 24 of the 53 bartenders were smokers who obviously smoked
less after the ban. All 53 were friendly enough toward the ban that they
agreed to participate in the study: many others refused. Thus the study
pool was strongly skewed from the very beginning!
 Most “improvements” noted were purely subjective: “I don’t notice my
eyes itching as much.” or “I don’t think I cough as much now.”
 The one scientific difference, a small improvement in some Pulmonary
Function Tests, was both below clinically significant levels and quite
sensitive to both experimenter effect and patient effort.
Finally, if you actually read the study rather than the headlines, you once again
find the claim of causality is not quite what it appears: Eisner actually wrote
that “the possibility that unmeasured (infections) or reduced active smoking
could still partially explain the observed improvement… reduced ETS
exposure… was associated with improved adult respiratory health… smoking
prohibition appears to have immediate beneficial effects...” (emphases added)
Possibilities of unmeasured partial explanations. Associated
with. Appears to have. Not quite the way the story made the
headlines, certainly nothing to indicate any long term harm or
health risk, and quite certainly nothing like the definitive statement of causality blasted over the media.
7
Siegel’s Restaurant Workers Study
(M. Siegel. Involuntary Smoking In The Restaurant Workplace. JAMA Vol. 270 #4, 1993)
In 1993 Dr. Michael Siegel combined six different studies to claim that
secondary smoke was giving bar/restaurant workers a 50% increase in lung
cancer. New York’s Mayor Bloomberg cited Siegel to justify the NY ban,
claiming Siegel had “carefully controlled” for workers’ smoking statuses.
If you actually read Siegel you’ll find that none of the six studies really
“carefully controlled” for individual smoking status. Only one of them even
asked about it. The others just used statistics.
In almost every case, Siegel seemed to pick careful subsets of workers to
support his argument. If the males in one study had low lung cancer and the
females had high… he picked the females. If the bartenders in another study
had high and the food counter workers had low… he picked the bartenders.
If the original authors cautioned against anyone else using their data because
it was unstable or unrepresentative, Siegel simply ignored the warnings and
used their data regardless!
In the formal setting of the medical journal Siegel stated that, even with all
the adjustments he had made, the evidence from the six studies merely
"suggested that there may be a 50 percent increase in lung cancer risk
among food-service workers that is in part attributable to tobacco smoke
exposure in the workplace."
"Suggested" there "may be" increased risk that was "in part"
“attributable” to tobacco smoke? Well, once the media got the story the
qualifiers went out the window. The New York Times and USA Today
reported that Siegel’s study showed smoking bans were a “life and death
issue” for workers with secondary smoke having a “devastating effect” on
their health.
Just as with Helena and the 53 bartenders, the hype and
flaws in the basic study design extended and grew to
blatantly fraudulent proportions once the spotlight of
the media was acquired.
Bans Reduce Air Pollution In Bars by 87, no, 91, no, 93%
(Many similar repeated studies in the past two years)
About three years ago two antismoking researchers hit upon a
wonderful idea: measure the smoke in a bar before a ban, then do it
again after a ban, and “discover” that there was less smoke!
Of course that wouldn’t be worth a $100,000 grant or a spot on the
Six O’Clock News by itself. So they took a visible element of smoke,
the “fine particulate matter”(FPM), pretended that it was the same as
the FPM from cars and industrial smog, and declared that bartenders
were now safer because the “EPA’s dangerous level of air pollution”
was reduced by various amazing amounts!
This particular scam has brought millions of dollars to
antismoking extremists in cities all over the world where
they keep “discovering” over and over and over again
that there’s less smoke in the air if no one is smoking!
To call it “air pollution” and pretend they are measuring the same
thing as the EPA is almost like taking a tablespoon of sugar crystals
and saying it is “the same thing” as a tablespoon of cyanide crystals.
Once again, a clever and catchy scare story for the
media: Bartenders saved from deaths due to “air
pollution”. And once again it’s a study that can be
repeated in city after city for ban after ban and in
news story after news story. But once again,
simply an outright fraud when dissected.
Otsuka’s 30 Minute Heart Attack Study
(Otsuka, R. et al. Acute Effects of Passive Smoking…. JAMA. Vol 286. #4. 2001)
In July of 2001, Ryo Otsuka supposedly showed that simply sharing a room
with a smoker for 30 minutes could kill you. The hype and fraud flashed
around the world with the same roar that would later greet Helena, but again if
you actually read the study rather than just the head-lines you’d find that:
 The smoke level (6ppm CO) was 300% higher than in the smoking
sections of pressurized airplanes. This was not just “a room with a
smoker” or a decently ventilated bar. Similar studies have used smoke
chambers with up to forty ppm CO: 2,000% more smoke than in a
smoky airplane cabin!
 Otsuka required extreme nonsmokers who avoided all smoke in daily
life to sign a protocol acknowledging dangerous conditions and then
stuck them in a smoke-choked room. The result? A small blood
chemistry change similar to what’s seen after a meal. The most
amazing thing is that there were no heart attacks just from the stress!
 There was no control. Even a high school science project would have
included a sham model and “protocol signing” with control subjects
exposed to harmless but eye-stinging levels of skunk scent and fog.
The control results would probably have been identical.
 Why wasn’t such a control set up? Could it be simply that the results
would have negated the point of the study and the Antismoking grant
money would have dried up? Perhaps… I honestly can’t think of any
other reason. Otsuka’s study didn’t show a physical reaction to
smoke: it showed a physical reaction to fear and stress… conditions
promoted more by Antismokers than by smoke.
Otsuka is at fault for deliberately using extreme experimental conditions
without reasonable controls. The media is at fault in not reporting those
conditions or the likely reaction of extreme nonsmokers. And Smoking
Prohibitionists are at fault for using this study to frighten people with the
idea that simply being near smokers for 30 minutes causes heart attacks.
This study and its use is an example of
fear-mongering in its ugliest sense.
10
Health Bites
The Antismoking Lobby has perfected the art of media sound bites.
Short, sweet, sticky to the mind, almost totally void of meaning … but
deadly in their effectiveness. They are just more lies though, and if you
know them you can laugh when you hear them. Some to watch for:
Antismokers claim smoking causes 400,000 premature deaths a year.
(Actually, this is a computer generated imaginary number. And half of those
imaginary deaths occur after age 72 … almost 20% of them after age 85!)
Antismokers claim scientific studies are unanimous and unequivocal in
proving secondary smoke is killing thousands from lung cancer.
(Actually, the vast majority fail to find even a basic statistically significant link.
The UN’s huge 1998 study actually found significant protection from lung
cancer in children exposed to secondary smoke at home!)
Antismokers claim smoke contains 4,000 poisons and carcinogens.
(Actually, by 2005 the EPA could only identify 432 in their ARB Report, and
the average modern diet contains thousands. In toxicology the amount is
what’s important: “The dose makes the poison.” Nonsmokers never absorb
enough smoke to even approach OSHA warning levels!)
Antismokers claim having a non-smoking section in a restaurant is the
same as having a non-pissing section in a pool.
(Actually, since pool water is changed about 1x/year and the air in a decent
restaurant is changed about 35,000x/year, they’re not the same at all!)
Antismokers claim California’s extreme bans reduced lung cancer by 14%. .
(Actually, that drop occurred in 1996… two years before their total ban!)
Antismokers claim that uncounted masses of hospitality workers are dying
every year from secondary smoke.
(Actually, uncounted is right… How many Blairs can dance on the head of a
pin?)
11
Health Conclusion
All five studies dissected are “Flagship Studies” used repeatedly by radicals
at public hearings. All five are the “best and the brightest” of the mountain of
studies that “prove” smoking bans save lives. And all five are fraudulently
used by Smoking Prohibitionists to scare the public into supporting
government mandated smoking bans.
Consider this question:
If they had the truth… Why would they lie?
Simple: people would never accept such a degree of government meddling
in their private lives just on the basis of annoyance. It’s the “threat to public
health” based on these studies that has made bans politically acceptable.
Smoking decisions in individual businesses should be based on the
needs and desires of their customers and workers. There is absolutely
no justification from a public health standpoint for universal smoking bans.
They are simply social engineering tools used to push a radical agenda. .
Antismoking extremists are fundamentally no different from the
Alcohol Prohibitionists of the last century, but their tools, tricks, and
media techniques are much more sophisticated. Rather than try
immediately for a socially unacceptable total prohibition they simply plan to
keep reducing the number of smokers by more and more bans and taxes.
If smokers, businesses, and the wider public can be shown how much
they’ve been lied to, the era of widespread smoking bans will be over.
Smoking will continue to be banned in certain private venues by their
owners’ decisions, and those decisions will be driven by the proven value of
business owners seeking to please their particular blend of customers.
That’s the way free governments are meant to work,
and that’s the way they’ll work once again when the
fraud built around secondary smoke is sufficiently
exposed.
12
The REAL Economic Results of a
Smoking Ban!
Presented by SmokersClubInc.com
And
Michael J. McFadden
Antismoking Lobbyists parade vague studies, filled with vague statistics,
based upon vaguely designed business criteria, and make vague claims
that after three years or so of vague losses, “business will recover to
almost pre-ban levels” as ravening thirsty hordes of nonsmokers cowering
in their homes transform into wild party animals. Of course this vague
assertion only holds true if we pretend that general economic inflation
does not exist, but that’s no more fanciful than the rest of their assertions.
We on the other hand simply present over 160 on the record real
examples of real businesses and real people negatively affected
in a real way by a single smoking ban just in New York State!*
No hidden statistics. No numbers juggling. No “private data”
that can’t be checked. Just reality. If you believe the UK ban
can’t be fought, read these pages and weep. *(about as big as England)
Or else… stand up and do something about it: Antismokers say bans are
“inevitable,” in the Borg’s Star Trek fashion of telling you that
“Resistance is futile!”
Resistance is not futile!
Pub owners deserve the right to run their businesses free from
interference by social engineers, and pub patrons and pub workers have
the right to choose smoking or nonsmoking pubs of their own free will.
Defend your freedoms! Stand up
and fight for your rights!
13
Ban Effects On NY Bars and Restaurants
(Collected & Organized by Dave Hitt, Samantha Phillipe and Michael McFadden)
Business
City
Name
Business
Closed? & Jobs
Details & Statements
Lost
Albany
BlessedSacrmntChurch
Bingo Hall
50%
Albany
Temple Israel
Bingo Hall
50%
Astoria
Athens Cafe
Restaurant
55% / 10
Auburn
Kim's Trackside Tavern
Tavern
25%
Bath
Hotel McDonald
Hotel
70%
Bath
Just One More
Tavern
30%
Bellerose
Finish Line
Bar/Rstrnt
40% / 2
Binghamton
Airport Inn
Tavern
40%
Binghamton
Edigan's
Restaurant
Binghamton
Valentines Tavern
Binghamton
Mama Lena's
Binghamton
Brewster
Broadalbin
Bronx
Buffalo
Buffalo
Yesterday's
The Roadhouse
The Lodge
Fieldstone
Legion Post1041
Amherst Bowling Center
Closed
100%
Closed
100%
Restaurant
Closed
100%
Bar/Rstrnt
Tavern
Bar/Rstrnt
Billiards/Bar
Bingo Hall
Bowling
Closed
100%
40%
50% / 1
40% / 1
68%
100%
Closed
According to Herb Holland, some of the regulars told
volunteers that they would abstain from playing bingo, to
protest the smoking ban. He hasn't seen them since.
“Our local Cayuga county health dept.refuses to issue
smoking waivers to businesses suffering a financial hardship.”
Evans says business has dropped at least 40% in the last
year. Her liquor license expires next April, and she doesn't
plan on renewing it. The Inn was a successful biz for 18 years.
Mama Lena's had been in business for more than 40 years.
Buffalo
Jimmy Macs
Bar & Grill
Buffalo
B&G Bar & Grill
Bar/Rstrnt
"Out of business, laid off 35 employees.... went from making a
steady living for 24 years to losing about $100,000/year
100% /
compliments of the ban. The government figures are lies. Tell
35
your friends who own bars that if the ban goes in they might
as well pack up and leave."
30%
Buffalo
Cabaret
Tavern
40% / 1
Buffalo
Cook Bar & Grill
Bar/Rstrnt
40% / 2
Buffalo
Freddies
Bar/Rstrnt
50%
Buffalo
Pocketeer Billiards
Pool Hall
Buffalo
Susie's Corner
Bar/Rstrnt
Buffalo
The Royal Pheasant
Restaurant
Buffalo
Voelker Bowling Center
Bowling
Camden
Harter's
Bar/Rstrnt
"The President says small business is the backbone of our
60-70% country, NYS says screw small business just give us your
money and your blood! All of it!!!!!!
23% / 1
100% / The smoking ban caused an instant 80% revenue loss. Royal
Pheasant had been a family business for 58 years.
20
The smoking ban hit us like an anvil, curtailing bowling activity
30-40%
by 30 to 40% and the bar business by 20 to 30%.
40%
Camden
Liberty Lanes
Bowling
27%
Canandaigua
Canandaig Billiards
Pool Hall
40%
Champlain
Cheektowaga
Cheektowaga
Stumble Inn
Metropolitan Rstrnt
Peter K's
Tavern
Bar/Rstrnt
Bar/Rstrnt
ChstnutRidge
Cicero
Clay
Silo's
DamonsPartyHouse
Richard's OleTimer
Bar & Grill
Tavern
Bar/Rstrnt
Closed
Closed
Closed
100%
25% / 2
35% / 2
35%
40%
17% / 1
Cold Brook
Clifford's Tavern
Bar/Rstrnt
40%
Corfu
Cortland
Dadio's Central
Argyle's
Tavern
Tavern
30%
12%
Cotati
Friar Tuck's
Restaurant
Delhi
EastRandolph
ElmiraHeights
ElmiraHeights
Endicott
Blinkey's
VFW Post 6533
American Legion
Blondie's Tavern
O's Place
Tavern
Private Club
Private Club
Tavern
Tavern
50%
Closed
Closed
100%
20%
60%
25%
100%
78%
After proving significant business loss, Mel's was granted one
of NY's few waivers. Their business immediately returned to
pre-ban level, but the owners are worried about what will
happen when the waiver runs out.
Closed
100%
Closed after 10 yrs. in business
Closed
100%
Falconer
Mel's Place
Tavern
Fredonia
Barker Brew Pub
Brew Pub
Falconer
Chances
Tavern
Frewsburg
The Loft
Tavern
30%
Fulton
Fulton Ale House
Tavern
25%
Goshen
The Wonderbar
Tavern
50%
"Our town has no attractions to draw in outsiders. We have
only locals to rely on as patrons and 95% of them smoke. It
will be worse when the snow sets in."
"Food and bar business are both down…. Friday dinners
down from 170to60. Monthly expenses are about $3,000 more
30% / 4 than sales. My life long dream of operating my own business
will be over in 6 months. My wife & 3 children… have used all
of our savings to supplement the business after the ban."
45%
The business lost almost $30,000 and 110 bowlers during the
32-week league season... In the busiest months ( January and
14% / 2
May), Parkin saw a 14 percent decrease in activity comparing
the same period in 2004 to 2003.
100%
Revenue from vending machines and games cut in half in
20-50%
many places.
Holland
The Holland Hotel
Bar/Rest/Hotel
Hyde Park
Kay Cey's
Tavern
Ithica
Bowl-O-Drome
Bowling
JacksnHghts
La Bataclana
Coin Operated
Amusements
Tavern
Vending
Machines
Closed
Jamestown
Elks Lodge (Priv. Club)
Private Club
Closed
Jamestown
Fountain Bowl
Bowling
Jamestown
Mr. D's
Bar/Rstrnt
Jamestown
Patsy's Lounge
Tavern
Jamestown
Tommy's Place
Bar/Rstrnt
Closed
100%
Jamestown
Windsor Ale House
Tavern
Closed
100%
Johnstown
Partner's Pub
Bar/Rstrnt
Kennedy
Crossroads Steaks
Restaurant
Lake George
Lemon Peel Lounge
Lounge
20% / 2
Lakewood
Liverpool
Lockawanna,
Ye Olde Anchor Inn
End Zone
Woody's Pub
18%
30% / 1
25% / 3
Long Island
Olympian Sumont Inc
Malone
Knights of Columbus
Bar/Rstrnt
Bar/Rstrnt
Bar/Rstrnt
Pool Hall/
Bar/Rstrnt
Bingo Hall
Malone
Seven's Bar
Tavern
30%
Marcellus
Village Tavern
Bar/Rstrnt
10%
Marcy
Riverside Lanes
Bowling
20% / 2
Jamestown
"Just as my establishment was beginning to flourish, I'm hit
with this smoking ban which has killed my daytime business.
People who used to stay for hours now only stay for one quick
drink and leave."
100%
Bingo, which funded their charitable work, is now shut down.
40% / 8
Closed
100%
50% / 2
"I have let 2 employees go and the other 3 have had their
hours cut in half."
20% / 1
Closed
100%
40% / 3
80%
15
"We are now opening later and closing earlier. We are a local
tavern with no food. The ban hurt."
"We had hoped...nonsmokers avoiding taverns due to the
smoke-filled air would make up for at least some of the
30% / 1
financial loss. Unfortunately, at least in our place, this has
most definitely not happened. Our sales are at an all time low."
11%
Massena
Delmar Sportsman's
Tavern
Tavern
Massena
Open Net Lounge
Tavern
Mattydale
The Cam-Nel
Tavern
Mayville
Lakeview Hotel/Blues
Rock Cafe
Tavern
Middletown
Whispers Cocktail Lounge Bar/NightClub
Middleport
Monroe
Mt. Morrison
NYC
Middleport Inn
Brazen Head Pub
MillsRace Rstrnt
Aessa
Bar/Rstrnt
Tavern
Bar/Rstrnt
Bar/Rstrnt
NYC
Blarney Stone
Bar/Rstrnt
15% / 1
NYC
Caffe on the Green
Bar/Rstrnt
35%
NYC
Castle Heights
Tavern
Closed
100%
NYC
Elbo Room
Tavern
Closed
100%
NYC
Fiddler's Green
Tavern
Closed
100%
NYC
Euzkadi
Restaurant
Closed
100%
The Cam-Nel opened in 1952, 53 years of pre-ban service.
50%
On the first day of the ban, my tips and number of customers
dropped 50%, and never came back up.
50%
Closed
100%/13 "This damn state really knows how to kill people's dreams."
40%
40%/2.5
35% / 6
Bar business fell about 35% immediately after the ban. It has
picked up since he added a "butt hut," an outdoor smoking
tent, but it's still less than before the ban.
“We’ve just lost too many customers to this law, which I didn’t
vote for, bar owners didn’t vote for, bartenders didn’t vote for,
& the public didn’t vote for."
50%
"Overnight, we lost 60 percent of our evening bar trade. For
the bar, it was the difference in profit and loss. Sales of
expensive cigars had been almost as important as the sales of
Scotch." Harry's was in business for more than 30 years.
NYC
Harry's Hanover Square
Bar/Rstrnt
Closed
100%
NYC
Le Bar Bat
Tavern
Closed
100%
Closed
In 2004 Madame X was voted #1 by CitySearch and Best
Lascivious Lounge by Shecky's. Despite this our gross was
over 30% down from 2002. Our summer sales tax dropped
50%. How can the city say profits are up when my profits are
50% / 8
so drastically down? It's clearly NOT because I manage my
bar poorly! The sole reason for this horrible state of affairs is
the smoking ban. We've lost 8 workers, cut staff and business
hours and tips are still down by a third. This is pitiful.
40% / 3
Stagnant sales have led to a 7% drop in beer demand
19%
citywide, and a 19% drop citywide to clubs.
100%/70
"People who don't go to pubs just don't go to pubs. They said
the ban would be good for business and for employees, yet
20% / 3 my business is down and three good staff are out of work and
unable to find another job...Most of my staff are smokers, and
now they're being protected from second-hand smoke."
100%
Lauterborn, 60, said his bar saw 40 customers nightly before
the ban but only about five after it. He has closed and says his
100%
children are supporting him while he looks for work. His tavern
had been a 100 year old family owned business.
40%
NYC
Madame X
Tavern
NYC
Restaurant
NYC
Millennium
Manhattan Beer
Distributors
Nocturne
NYC
O'Neill's
Tavern
NYC
Pangaea
Tavern
Closed
NYC
Roesch's
Tavern
Closed
NYC
Slade
Restaurant
NYC
Vendor
Nightclub
NYC
Sugoba Bistro
Bistro
Closed
After 8 years of success in NYC, the NY smoking ban killed
100% / my Bistro in less than a year! In less than 3 months my
business declined 37%. Within six months I was unable to
28
meet payroll and I had to lay off 28 employees.
NYC
Swan's
Tavern
Closed
"I felt bad laying off seven workers. Most of them had been
100% / 7 with me for the five years Swan's was open. None of them had
ever complained about secondhand smoke. "
NYC
Whiskey Ward
Tavern
20% / 2
16
NYC
Swift's
Tavern
40%
Newburgh
Niagara Falls
GoldenRailAleHouse
The Press Box
Tavern
Tavern
Closed
25%
100%
Niagara Falls
Kelly’s Korner Bar
Tavern
Closed
100%
Ogdensburg
The Web
Tavern
Closed
100%
Oneida
Bec's Ivy Grill
Bar & Grill
23% / 3
Oneida
Five Corners
Bar/Rstrnt
32
Oswego
Buoy's Dockside Tvn
Tavern
37%
Oswego
Eagle Beverage Company Distributor
25%
Oswego
Parkville
Port Leyden
Shamrock Tavern
Tavern
Champions Billiards Cafe Pub / Pool Hall
Central Hotel
Bar/Rstrnt
50%
33%
50%
Portville
Potsdam
Maple Tree Inn
VFW Post 1194
Tavern
Tavern
Closed
100% / 3
22%
Potville
Cork and Bottle
Tavern
Closed
100%
Remsen
Rochester
Rochester
Taylor's Trackside
Bar/Rstrnt
Christanis
Tavern
Hancock's Hudson Tavern Bar/Rstrnt
Rochester
Panorama
Sports Bar/
Night Club
Rochester
Salingers
Tavern
Rochester
The Loop Lounge
Bar/Rstrnt
Rome
Sanborn
Sammy G's
Walmore Inn
Bar/Rstrnt
Rstrnt/Tav.
Savannah
D&S Diner
Restaurant
Scottsville
Sloan
SouthDayton
Amer. Legion Post1830
Unique Lounge
Rough Kutts
Private Club
Bar/Rstrnt
Tavern
70%
40% / 4
21% / 1
Southport
George&Shirl's TinyTavn
Tavern
41%
Springville
Pocketeer BilliardsSouth
Pool Hall
Staten Island
Sharkey's
Sports Bar
"It's absolutely killed us. This time last year the bar would be
packed with the after-work cocktail crowd. Now they just take
a bottle of wine or a six-pack home where they can smoke."
The Press Box was open for 45 years.
“It has been the worst ride of my life since the ban. Kelly’s has
been around 67 years and I tried to save it with no luck.”
Owners Janet and Anthony Doerr say the smoking ban
destroyed their business.
“After 20 years of hard work this is what NY state does to us.
Where are all these nonsmokers? “
"Deliveries to pubs & taverns have decreased more than 25%
"It's not right. Our livelihood is being taken away."
Located near the PA border, this was literally a Mom and Pop
business, run by a couple with no employees to "protect."
50%
40%
15%
“We are a small night club that was doing very well until the
50% / 4 smoking ban hit us and it hit us very hard. We are very scared
of our future, if any . “
35% / 2
“I own a small local tavern and I have a 90% smoking cliental.
30%
Let me say it just sucks. “
50%
“Thank you for fighting this ban.”
Closed
Closed
100%
100%
Sales were down $3,000 in July 2002 compared to July 2001.
Hardest hit were on Friday nights and Sunday mornings.
In Oct. 2002, the bar made $6,000. This October, after the
ban, they made just $3,500.
"Pocketeer Billiards South is now officially closed due to the
Hitler like laws the NYS. Politicians have enacted! I like many
others have now chosen to leave after living here 58 years."
60%
Steamburg
Coldspring Volunteer Fire
Tavern
Department
Suffern
Ireland's 32
Tavern
“The fire department owns the bar. Bar money buys
equipment for the fire dept and has been cut in half. This
money buys new ambulances, trucks, gear etc. Remember,
50% / 1
this is all volunteer. Without the bar money we have to rely on
the town for revenue. You may lose your house or even
someone's life without the money for the equipment. “
50%
Sunnyside
Caseys Pub
Tavern
35% / 1
Syracuse
Barrie's Tavern
Tavern
40%
Syracuse
Doc's little Gem
Diner
25% / 10
Syracuse
ColemanIrishPub
Bar/Rstrnt
19% / 4
17
"We fought tooth and nail and won a local County victory, only
for the state to turn it over to a complete ban."
Syracuse
Dodesters
Tavern
20%
Syracuse
Nibsy's Pub
Bar/Rstrnt
18%
Syracuse
Rafferty's
Bar/Rstrnt
35% / 2
Syracuse
Syracuse Brigadiers
Bingo Hall
61%
Syracuse
Syracuse
Syracuse
Tonawanda
Bar/Rstrnt
Tavern
ComedyClub
Pool Hall
25%
40%
30
25%
Bingo Hall
30-35%
Troy
ThompsnRdTvn
Tommys
Viva Debris
Slick Willie's
Celtic Cultural
Organization
Holmes & Watson's
Tavern
30%
Utica
Utica
Utica,
The Dog House
Varick
Shortys Bar&Grill
Bar/Rstrnt
Bar/Rstrnt
Bar/Rstrnt
28%
35%
30%
Wallkill
Desperado's
Tavern
90%
Watertown
Brown Shanty
Tavern
20% / 1
Wellsburg
Village Tavern
Tavern
50%
West Seneca
Southgate Lanes
Bowling Bar
Wheatfield
The Alps
Restaurant
Closed
100%
Wheatfield
The Meeting Place
Bar/Rstrnt
Closed
100%
Wilson
Jean’s Bar&Grill
Tavern
Troy
"My business is down 20% from the same period last year,
even though I'm now open three more hours a day and I didn't
have a kitchen then."
"The hall was losing about $60,000 per month in net income
for the past three months because of the smoking ban."
"From July 25 - Nov. 1, we are down about $12,000 from the
same period last year."
"I can count on my fingers the people who don't smoke who
come in…The regulars say they won't come."
55% / 7
26%
After California’s smoking ban, we’d see TV
interviews of people sitting in a bar enjoying a
drink, telling the camera that this is the first time
they'd been able to go to a bar since the smoke
always bothered them and now they'd be able to
go out for drinks and enjoy themselves.
One such interview was at a bar in San Diego
where I knew the owner personally. The next
time I spoke with her she angrily told me it was a
set-up and she hadn't seen the couple since that
day. She was finally learning, a little too late,
what she was up against.
-Marty Ronhovdee
18
Do You REALLY Want Statistics?
Antismoking Lobbyists like to say that “Legitimate” studies show
no harm to business from extremist smoking bans. They wave a
set of studies up in the air, summarized, organized, paid for, and
chosen by themselves of course, and claim that any contrary
studies are somehow connected to “Big Tobacco.”
Actually, the studies showing no harm are usually paid for
from Antismoking grants and are specifically designed to
show no harm. Those showing a loss in business are usually
sponsored by the owners actually facing these losses!
Prohibitionists like to lump together take-out and fast food chains
with bars and restaurants to hide bar losses. But even with this
blurring of statistics, it’s possible to see the real effects of smoking
bans when one compares “Smoker-Friendly” states to “SmokerUnfriendly” states.
Antismokers point to a 6% growth in California’s hospitality trade
between smoke-friendly 1990 and smoke-banned 1998. They’ll
ignore the fact that trade growth in smoker-friendly states like
North Carolina and Virginia was 77% and 57%… a growth over
ten times greater! See the table on the next page for the facts.
When one compares California’s figures to those of the
states on its borders a truly incredible figure emerges. While
other factors may be partly responsible, the raw data
indicates that California’s bans have actually cost it over one
hundred billion dollars of such growth in the last 15 years!
No wonder its economy is in trouble!
See table on following page. Full study at
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/economic.html
19
(All Figures Below in Billions of Dollars)
SMOKER UNFRIENDLY STATES
Bar & Restaurant Trade
YEAR
1990
Total Retail Trade
1998
1990
1998
===========================================
CA
26.3
28.0
225
291
NY
13.1
13.8
124
148
MA
6.1
5.9
50.7
62.6
VT
0.46
0.44
4.5
6.0
SMOKER FRIENDLY STATES & Whole USA
Bar & Restaurant Trade
YEAR
1990
Total Retail Trade
1998
1990
1998
===========================================
NC
4.5
8.0
45.8
81.1
VA
4.4
6.9
47.5
73.6
MO
3.5
5.7
36.0
57.3
TX
11.4
18.4
120
190
USA
182
260
1807
2695
(Data tabulated from the publicly available Statistical Abstracts of the United States,
years 1992 and 2000, tables 1292 and 1295, by David Kuneman and Michael J.
McFadden..)
20
Just a Few More Statistics…
 A Dec 2003 post-ban survey of 300 NY bars found a 19% sales
drop and a job loss of 2,650. A claimed 8.7% sales increase
was exposed as a lie and NY’s bars are now suffering intense
attacks for the noise, littering, and rowdiness of crowds of
outdoor smokers.
 Estimates on ban effects in England run as high as 3,500
closed pubs and many thousands of workers out of jobs. Of
course some job options will be picked up by massive numbers
of “smoke police” enforcing the ban and policing unruly sidewalk
smokers.
 The SLTA’s 03/07 Scottish Pub Survey reported “34% of
members reported that they had let staff go…just 3% who had
hired more staff.
 Edinburgh’s famous Leith Walk resembles the aftermath of a
war zone with pub after pub shuttered and dark while refugees
huddle outside of those remaining open but smokeless.
 The Vintners Federation of Ireland now claims that 1,000 or
more Irish pubs have had to close since their ban started.
Taking a not unreasonable loss estimate of 10% for pubs, let’s see
the future of a total English ban. Taking 40,000 pubs with average
gross incomes of ₤100,000 each gives totals 4 billion pounds/year.
10% of that is a staggering loss of ₤400,000,000. If it lasts for just
two years, total loss would be eight hundred million pounds!
This is what antismoking extremists like to call a “temporary
adjustment period.” Think what that temporary adjustment period
will mean for you personally as well as for England! (especially if
it’s NOT temporary).
This is a fight worth fighting and worth winning!
21
Bans are NOT inevitable!
Antismokers are desperately afraid of resistance. By using an “Attila/Borg”
strategy they try to simply avoid a battle by convincing their enemies that
“RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!”
Resistance is NOT futile! In just the 30 days before Philadelphia’s March
2005 ban hearing we saw the following in the news:
Feb 7th, LaPorte Indiana City Council defeated a smoking ban by a vote of 4-3 to a standing
ovation from a packed chamber.
th
Feb 8 , Virginia Senate defeated a restaurant ban by a vote of 26 to 14.
Feb 11th, Washington State Supreme Court ruled local health boards can't ban bar smoking.
Feb 17th, North Dakota House of Reps defeated a ban by a vote of 47 to 45.
Feb 22nd, Montana House of Reps exempted bars and casinos from their state smoking ban
rules by a vote of 58 to 42.
nd
Feb 22 , Braxton County W. Virginia amended their ban to allow smoking in bars/casinos.
Feb 23rd, Indiana scaled back a ban and now simply requires family restaurants to have
limited nonsmoking sections.
Mar 2nd, Minnesota House Committee killed a statewide restaurant ban.
Mar 4th, Wayne County Michigan shelved a ban after worker opposition.
Mar 4th, New Mexico Senate rejected a statewide ban by a vote of 22-16.
Mar 4th, Maryland Senate Committee rejected a statewide ban for the third time.
Mar 6th, South Dakota smoking ban bill "died with almost no debate on the House floor."
How typical was that 30-day period? I have no idea. Even with the Internet
such research isn’t all that easy. I do know that in the Spring of 2006, New
Hampshire, Virginia, Tennessee & Maryland ALL defeated Statewide bans.
Twelve victories in just one month over the modern day Huns who are
trying to scare us into easy surrenders should make the point though. Four
state-level wins last Spring should make it again despite November’s losses.
The claim that universal smoking bans are
inevitable is just as big a lie as the claim that the
smallest trace of secondary smoke is deadly.
22
THEIR NEXT MOVE
Don’t make the mistake of thinking the fight will be over if
you give them the family restaurants, or give them the barrestaurants, or even if you just hold out just for private clubs.
The antismoking extremists hate smoking with a passion and
they will never stop until they have everything…
Unless you stop them.
You’ve heard of Calabasas and Belmont in California where
they’ve banned smoking outdoors, even on your own front
porch if a neighbor or passer-by objects.
Even that is not enough for them:
Smoke Free Pennsylvania’s Bill Godshall complained that,
“Unfortunately for many involuntary smokers in Calabasas,
the ordinance exempts many different locations, so people will
still be exposed to tobacco smoke pollution..”, and noted that,
“The new rules exempt residences, backyards...”
John Banzhaf, founder of Action On Smoking and Health now
boasts “Here we are literally reaching into the last frontier -right into the home... No longer can you argue, 'My home is
my castle. I've got the right to smoke.' ”
Stop Them Now!
23
What You Need To Do!
1)
Duplicate, post, & pass out flyers and booklets to activate
and educate people about smoking bans. Smokers almost
NEVER object to being handed one of these flyers!
2)
Place copies of this booklet where customers and staff can
read. Information is where the Antismokers can’t beat us:
they have the sound bites, but we’ve got the facts.
3)
Support pubs participating in Day of Defiance! activities.
Call and write papers and TV stations to ensure fair
coverage of ban effects and Defiance. No complicated
message needed: Just tell them where you stand! Speak at
Council meetings and CONTACT YOUR MPS!
Antismokers win bans by doing this all the time. Don’t
let them get away with it!
4)
Get connected!! Join and support Freedom2Choose and
other rights-oriented groups. Groups like F2C, Forces.org
and SmokersClubInc.com get no tax or tobacco industry
money. They NEED popular support in this battle! Sign
up for the Club’s free weekly newsletter and join a
smokers’ rights email list to stay updated and connect
with others directly. The Antismoking and Antialcohol
groups are large, well-funded, and well organized.
You can’t fight them alone!
24
It is said that when the British went to India with
guns to force the natives to spin cloth, Gandhi rallied
his people and reminded them that the British really
had no power over them. The soldiers could not spin
cloth with guns… all they could do was shoot people.
If they wanted cloth they needed those people alive.
The government can not run the pubs of the United
Kingdom. Only their owners can. Government
smoking bans can only stand with the support of the
people. They are only stopped when that support is
withdrawn.
Get connected and active NOW before it’s too late!
In the final analysis
what happens is only up to you.
Copyright 2007 by Michael J. McFadden
Author of Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains
May be copied and distributed freely in support of Defiance! activities.
Email: Cantiloper@aol.com for bulk customized bound copies.
Visit: www.AntiBrains.com , StopTheBan at tinyurl.com/2fy3ab
www.SADireland.com , www.freedom2choose.co.uk
and www.SmokersClubInc.com
25